- 167,703
- 76,302
Hello.
As most of you know, our wiki is turning increasingly popular. The problem with this is that my workload has also drastically increased.
Even though I try to sift through the tasks as well as I can, and only focus on the most important ones, I simply cannot keep up, even with an over 80 hour work week.
As a result, I am currently eating, sleeping, and working with the wiki, and almost nothing else. If this continues, I will rapidly approach a burnout, and be unable to continue to help out at all in the future.
I have to remove some part of my workload, and unfortunately this means most of the content revision threads, as this is the part of the work that can more easily be shared and solved amongst the rest of the staff.
The monitoring of most suspicious edits in the wiki is the more important task that I perform daily, and also the one that I am more efficiently able to handle, so I think that this seems like the better option.
Of course, there are drawbacks with this. An awful lot of important content revision threads will remain unattended and never lead anywhere, unless the rest of the staff takes a more active hand than currently in trying to evaluate them, which is very unfortunate, but I do not seem to have a choice in this matter any more.
I have some advice for the staff regarding how to more efficiently resolve content revision threads:
As most of you know, our wiki is turning increasingly popular. The problem with this is that my workload has also drastically increased.
Even though I try to sift through the tasks as well as I can, and only focus on the most important ones, I simply cannot keep up, even with an over 80 hour work week.
As a result, I am currently eating, sleeping, and working with the wiki, and almost nothing else. If this continues, I will rapidly approach a burnout, and be unable to continue to help out at all in the future.
I have to remove some part of my workload, and unfortunately this means most of the content revision threads, as this is the part of the work that can more easily be shared and solved amongst the rest of the staff.
The monitoring of most suspicious edits in the wiki is the more important task that I perform daily, and also the one that I am more efficiently able to handle, so I think that this seems like the better option.
Of course, there are drawbacks with this. An awful lot of important content revision threads will remain unattended and never lead anywhere, unless the rest of the staff takes a more active hand than currently in trying to evaluate them, which is very unfortunate, but I do not seem to have a choice in this matter any more.
I have some advice for the staff regarding how to more efficiently resolve content revision threads:
- If you are not knowledgeable about a certain subject, inform the people who are by checking through the Knowledgeable Members List page. If that does not work, you can inspect the "supporters & opponents" section of the verse page instead, or simply ask the people arguing for a change to write down an easy to understand summary of their conclusions.
- Attach appropriate page tags/topics at the bottom of the thread, so it is easier to search for and find the discussions in the future, and if necessary remove extremely inappropriate ones. For example, the Dragon Ball verse page should be tagged for questions about these characters, and the Tiering System page for questions directly concerning its applications.
- Close threads that have reached a clear conclusion, or they will recurrently continue for months with derailed nonsense discussions.
- If you have unlocked profiles for a certain series of edits, make sure to lock them again afterwards.
- Given that I won't monitor discussions nearly as much anymore, it is extra important to state in the edit summary in which thread a certain change has been approved by the staff, for my edit monitoring to run much easier. It might be a good idea to add this requirement to the editing rules.
